November 2014 - Boost - lists.preview.boost.org

noexcept(true) for ~noncopyable?
by Olaf van der Spek 18 Nov '14

18 Nov '14

Shouldn't ~noncopyable be noexcept? I'm seeing this error: class Cconnection : public Cclient, boost::noncopyable connection.h:5:7: error: looser throw specifier for ‘virtual Cconnection::~Cconnection()’ In file included from connection.h:3:0, from connection.cpp:2: client.h:10:10: error: overriding ‘virtual Cclient::~Cclient() noexcept (true)’ https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/10698 -- Olaf

2 3

[BGL] [push_relabel_max_flow]
by Pablo Madoery 18 Nov '14

18 Nov '14

Hello, I am having trouble using the push_relabel_max_flow algorithm when i put std::numeric_limits<double>::max() as capacity attribute in some edges. is there a maximum value that I can use as capacities. which ?. This is the example I am using : #include <iostream> #include <boost/graph/adjacency_list.hpp> #include <boost/graph/push_relabel_max_flow.hpp> #include <boost/graph/graphviz.hpp> using namespace std; using namespace boost; struct vertexInfo { }; struct edgeInfo { double capacity; double residualCapacity; double flow; adjacency_list_traits<vecS, vecS, bidirectionalS>::edge_descriptor rev; edgeInfo() { residualCapacity = 1000; } }; typedef adjacency_list<vecS, vecS, bidirectionalS, vertexInfo, edgeInfo> Graph; typedef Graph::edge_descriptor edge_d; const char* names[] = { "SV", "L1", "L2", "L3", "L4", "ET"}; template<typename Vertex> void create_edge(Graph& g, Vertex v0, Vertex v1, double capacity) { //the algorithm requires that for each edge u-v in the graph, the edge v-u also exists Graph::edge_descriptor ep0 = (add_edge(v0, v1, g)).first; Graph::edge_descriptor ep1 = (add_edge(v1, v0, g)).first; g[ep0].capacity = capacity; g[ep0].rev = ep1; g[ep1].capacity = 0; // the capacity of v-u needs to be 0 g[ep1].rev = ep0; } int main() { Graph graph; Graph::vertex_descriptor SV = add_vertex(graph); Graph::vertex_descriptor L1 = add_vertex(graph); Graph::vertex_descriptor L2 = add_vertex(graph); Graph::vertex_descriptor L3 = add_vertex(graph); Graph::vertex_descriptor L4 = add_vertex(graph); Graph::vertex_descriptor ET = add_vertex(graph); create_edge(graph, SV, L1, std::numeric_limits<double>::max()); create_edge(graph, SV, L2, std::numeric_limits<double>::max()); create_edge(graph, SV, L3, std::numeric_limits<double>::max()); create_edge(graph, SV, L4, std::numeric_limits<double>::max()); create_edge(graph, L3, ET, 1000); create_edge(graph, L4, L3, 1000); create_edge(graph, L2, L3, 1000); create_edge(graph, L1, L2, 1000); // arcos de vuelta create_edge(graph, L3, L4, 1000); create_edge(graph, L3, L2, 1000); create_edge(graph, L2, L1, 1000); std::cout << "Max flow: " << push_relabel_max_flow(graph, SV, ET, get(&edgeInfo::capacity, graph), get(&edgeInfo::residualCapacity, graph), get(&edgeInfo::rev, graph), get(boost::vertex_index, graph)) << std::endl; graph_traits<Graph>::vertex_iterator vi, vi_end; graph_traits<Graph>::out_edge_iterator ei, ei_end; cout.precision(20); for (tie(vi, vi_end) = vertices(graph); vi!= vi_end; ++vi) { for (tie(ei, ei_end) = out_edges(*vi, graph); ei != ei_end; ++ei) { graph[*ei].flow = graph[*ei].capacity - graph[*ei].residualCapacity; if (graph[*ei].capacity > 0) { std::cout << names[*vi] << " " << names[target(*ei, graph)] << " " << (graph[*ei].capacity - graph[*ei].residualCapacity) << "/" << graph[*ei].capacity << std::endl; } } } cout<<"end"<<endl; return 0; } ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- And this is the exception: /home/madoery/boost_1_55_0/boost/graph/push_relabel_max_flow.hpp:706: typename boost::property_traits<CapacityEdgeMap>::value_type boost::push_relabel_max_flow(Graph&, typename boost::graph_traits<Graph>::vertex_descriptor, typename boost::graph_traits<Graph>::vertex_descriptor, CapacityEdgeMap, ResidualCapacityEdgeMap, ReverseEdgeMap, VertexIndexMap) [with Graph = boost::adjacency_list<boost::vecS, boost::vecS, boost::bidirectionalS, vertexInfo, edgeInfo>, CapacityEdgeMap = boost::adj_list_edge_property_map<boost::bidirectional_tag, double, double&, long unsigned int, edgeInfo, double edgeInfo::*>, ResidualCapacityEdgeMap = boost::adj_list_edge_property_map<boost::bidirectional_tag, double, double&, long unsigned int, edgeInfo, double edgeInfo::*>, ReverseEdgeMap = boost::adj_list_edge_property_map<boost::bidirectional_tag, boost::detail::edge_desc_impl<boost::bidirectional_tag, long unsigned int>, boost::detail::edge_desc_impl<boost::bidirectional_tag, long unsigned int>&, long unsigned int, edgeInfo, boost::detail::edge_desc_impl<boost::bidirectional_tag, long unsigned int> edgeInfo::*>, VertexIndexMap = boost::vec_adj_list_vertex_id_map<vertexInfo, long unsigned int>, typename boost::property_traits<CapacityEdgeMap>::value_type = double, typename boost::graph_traits<Graph>::vertex_descriptor = long unsigned int]: Assertion `algo.is_flow()' failed. Thank You

1 0

gdb pretty printers
by Paul Fee 18 Nov '14

18 Nov '14

Hi all, On Linux, when using GDB to debug C++ programs that use Boost, it's difficult to get human readable values from variables. e.g. == Source == boost::optional<std::string> s("hello world"); == GDB == (gdb) print s $1 = {<boost::optional_detail::optional_base<std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > >> = {<boost::optional_detail::optional_tag> = {<No data fields>}, m_initialized = true, m_storage = {dummy_ = {data = "(0`\000\000\000\000", aligner_ = {<No data fields>}}}}, <No data fields>} ======== A set of python pretty printers that understand the internals of some Boost objects can be found here: https://github.com/ruediger/Boost-Pretty-Printer The resulting output is more useful: == GDB == (gdb) print s $2 = boost::optional<std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > > is initialized = {value = "Hello world"} ========= Some distros, e.g. Fedora, CentOS have STL pretty printers working out of the box. It would be great to also have Boost pretty printers widely available via Linux distros. Since the pretty printers are tightly coupled to the objects they're printing, it would be ideal if they were included with Boost. That way both the class definitions and python printers should stay in sync. Can someone provide guidance on how to get code in the above github repo into Boost? Thanks, Paul

1 0

Boost config macros for 'override' and 'final'?
by Nat Goodspeed 17 Nov '14

17 Nov '14

I don't find in Boost 1.57 any Boost macros to mediate use of the 'override' or 'final' C++11 specifiers. Would that be a reasonable addition?

6 7

RFC/patch: compile boost on Android for platform development
by Wagner, David 17 Nov '14

17 Nov '14

Hi, We are evaluating the pros and cons of using Boost for platform development on Android. We have successfully built and run Asio's "chat" server and client examples on an Android device running Lollipop. The C++ support seems to have been greatly improved since KitKat. Even though it is still early to say that all of Boost runs ok, all the Asio unit tests passed with "*** No errors detected" except the multicast test. I've attached a patch that adds Android makefiles to relevant libraries for compiling Boost.Asio. It's a first draft and it doesn't use the git submodules. The development of this patch has been made on top of the 1.56.0 tag. Platform development on android is different than native development ("NDK", used for JNI libraries). There seem to have been several efforts made for Boost support on NDK but we haven't found any for platform development (which is aimed at device support, e.g., HAL development, native tools). Is there an interest for maintaining a set of Android makefiles on vanilla Boost ? I understand someone would need to run the regression tests on Android; is there any other such requirement ? Kind Regards, -- David Wagner Intel Corp. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Intel Corporation SAS (French simplified joint stock company) Registered headquarters: "Les Montalets"- 2, rue de Paris, 92196 Meudon Cedex, France Registration Number: 302 456 199 R.C.S. NANTERRE Capital: 4,572,000 Euros This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.

2 2

Re: [boost] Is there interest in a library for string-convertible enums?
by Jeffrey Bush 17 Nov '14

17 Nov '14

> > Jeffrey Bush wrote: > > > I have also offered a class for doing this as well, although it didn't > draw > > the interest that this one did. > > Here was my attempt at it with a test/example class: > > https://gist.github.com/coderforlife/6d8bac451d49dd1a0c81 > > > > > Looks good to me, and seems to be quite close to what I aim at. > > But the definition seems very user unfriendly. Is it correct that > > you always have to declare enums in the public namespace? > > --- > > Felix > Sorry for the delayed response. It does support being in a public namespace, even as a sub-class. However the definition does get uglier in sub-classes. The major problem I ran into was that the class could not be defined in a header file without getting multiple-definition or as a sub-class without running into problems. Mainly because of the constant arrays in the classes couldn't be defined in-line and in headers. Some C++11 features may help get around this. I do think that when these issues are ignored the declarations are pretty nice: BOOST_FLAGS_WITH_VALUES(MyFlags, std::uint8_t, A, 1, B, 2, AB, 3, C, 4); BOOST_FLAGS(MyDefaultFlags, AX, BX, CX, DX, EX, FX, GX, HX); namespace MyNS { BOOST_FLAGS(MyFlags, M, N, O, P, Q); } That makes 3 different enumerations, first with custom values and a custom base (uint8_t), the second with default values (powers of two) and selects the smallest base type, and the third is the same but in a non-public-namespace. All of these don't work in header files without getting multiple definitions. To avoid that problem you can do something like: // In H file: BOOST_FLAGS_DECL(MyFlags, M, N, O, P, Q); // In CPP file: BOOST_FLAGS_DEFN(MyFlags, M, N, O, P, Q); The same technique can be used to make sub-classes (as in the example file). If I remember correctly if the ability to go from string -> value and get list of values at runtime then the ugliness of the separate DECL/DEFN would be avoided. Jeff

1 0

Re: [boost] [review][sort] Formal review period for Sort library begins today, November 10, and ends Wednesday, November 19
by Niall Douglas 16 Nov '14

16 Nov '14

On 10 Nov 2014 at 0:39, Edward Diener wrote: > - What is your evaluation of the design? It's okay. I would prefer a design where there is a sorted_view which if std::copy gives an actually sorted copy. Obviously one would then specialise that scenario with a more directly optimised specialisation, and you'd also have the API presented here which looks like std::sort(). I'd also prefer to see fallback implementations for less than random iterators, right down to forward only iterators. > - What is your evaluation of the implementation? There seems to be an assumption that user supplied overloads and specialisations e.g. swap() don't throw exceptions. I think that unwise. BOOST_NOEXCEPT can test if something can throw. Explicit guarantees of what happens when something does throw needs to be in the documentation, per API. There seems to be a general lack of explicit C++ 11 support as well. In particular, I think all Boost libraries should use inline namespaces to implement ABI version management. Implementation isn't capable of dual build as standalone use without any dependency on Boost. I'd suggest my forthcoming Boost.BindLib library. > - What is your evaluation of the documentation? Lacks exception guarantees, one per API. Lacks scaling graphs near front so people can quickly evaluate usefulness compared to std::sort. I believe the author will fix this though. > - What is your evaluation of the potential usefulness of the > library? > - Did you try to use the library? With what compiler? Did you > have any problems? No. > - How much effort did you put into your evaluation? A glance? A > quick reading? In-depth study? Glance. > - Are you knowledgeable about the problem domain? Author of a very popular open source indexing algorithm library. > And finally, every review should attempt to answer this question: > > - Do you think the library should be accepted as a Boost library? Yes with these conditions: 1. Either change its name to Boost.Spreadsort, or do a much better job at a general sort library e.g. sorted_view, more than one sort algorithm not in the STL, more than random access iterator support. 2. Exception safety is not obvious, and explicit exception guarantees need to be made and stated per API in the documentation. 3. Explicit ABI version management in C++ 11 using inline namespaces. Forthcoming Boost.BindLib can do this for you, or it can be done by hand. It would also be nice if this library were also capable of standalone build without Boost, but this is not a requirement. Niall -- ned Productions Limited Consulting http://www.nedproductions.biz/ http://ie.linkedin.com/in/nialldouglas/

2 4

Re: [boost] How do I authenticate myself?
by Felix Uhl 14 Nov '14

14 Nov '14

Andrey Semashev wrote: > Note that you can have anonymous read-only access if you change the URL a little: > git://github.com/boostorg/boost.git > That should probably be mentioned in the docs. Thank you very much, that was exactly what I needed. Should've probably thought about that myself. I agree, that should be mentioned. Especially under the point "try out modular boost". --- Felix Uhl ________________________________ Von: Andrey Semashev<mailto:andrey.semashev@gmail.com> Gesendet: ‎14.‎11.‎2014 14:17 An: boost(a)lists.boost.org<mailto:boost@lists.boost.org> Betreff: Re: [boost] How do I authenticate myself? On Friday 14 November 2014 10:55:36 Felix Uhl wrote: > I want to clone the current develop branch > > to verify that a bugfix to a trac item I opened > > does actually fix the bug. > > > It seems like this information should be easy > > to find on the boost webpage or wiki, but neither > > of both explain how to authenticate myself > > when using “git clone --recursive git@ > > github.com:boostorg/boost.git modular-boost >clone.log”. > > The output of this is “Permission denied (publickey)”, > > which seems to mean to me that I need a > > ssh key the server actually knows about or that I have > > to upload my public key somehow. > > > Have I just missed something on the wiki? As Boost is hosted on GitHub, all the options it offers also work with Boost. See here: https://help.github.com/articles/which-remote-url-should-i-use/ Note that you can have anonymous read-only access if you change the URL a little: git://github.com/boostorg/boost.git That should probably be mentioned in the docs. _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

1 0

Re: [boost] How do I authenticate myself?
by Felix Uhl 14 Nov '14

14 Nov '14

Adam Wulkiewicz wrote: >FYI, instead of preparing a patch and attaching it to a bug report you >could consider working directly on the development version of a library >and propose a pull request with the fix on GitHub. The fix is not mine, I have opened a ticket, the author has written a fix and I just wanted to clone to check if the fix has fixed the issue. Thanks for the link, though, I'll make sure to check it out. --- Felix Uhl ________________________________ Von: Adam Wulkiewicz<mailto:adam.wulkiewicz@gmail.com> Gesendet: ‎14.‎11.‎2014 14:48 An: boost(a)lists.boost.org<mailto:boost@lists.boost.org> Betreff: Re: [boost] How do I authenticate myself? Andrey Semashev wrote: > On Friday 14 November 2014 10:55:36 Felix Uhl wrote: >> I want to clone the current develop branch >> >> to verify that a bugfix to a trac item I opened >> >> does actually fix the bug. >> >> >> It seems like this information should be easy >> >> to find on the boost webpage or wiki, but neither >> >> of both explain how to authenticate myself >> >> when using “git clone --recursive git@ >> >> github.com:boostorg/boost.git modular-boost >clone.log”. >> >> The output of this is “Permission denied (publickey)”, >> >> which seems to mean to me that I need a >> >> ssh key the server actually knows about or that I have >> >> to upload my public key somehow. >> >> >> Have I just missed something on the wiki? > As Boost is hosted on GitHub, all the options it offers also work with Boost. > See here: > > https://help.github.com/articles/which-remote-url-should-i-use/ > > Note that you can have anonymous read-only access if you change the URL a > little: > > git://github.com/boostorg/boost.git > > That should probably be mentioned in the docs. FYI, instead of preparing a patch and attaching it to a bug report you could consider working directly on the development version of a library and propose a pull request with the fix on GitHub. Here is a tutorial showing how this could be done: https://github.com/boostorg/geometry/wiki/Contribution-Tutorial It was made for Geometry but the procedure looks the same for any other library. Regards, Adam _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

1 0

How do I authenticate myself?
by Felix Uhl 14 Nov '14

14 Nov '14

I want to clone the current develop branch to verify that a bugfix to a trac item I opened does actually fix the bug. It seems like this information should be easy to find on the boost webpage or wiki, but neither of both explain how to authenticate myself when using “git clone --recursive git@ github.com:boostorg/boost.git modular-boost >clone.log”. The output of this is “Permission denied (publickey)”, which seems to mean to me that I need a ssh key the server actually knows about or that I have to upload my public key somehow. Have I just missed something on the wiki? --- Felix Uhl

3 2

[sort] Review of the Sort library by Steven Ross
by Edward Diener 14 Nov '14

14 Nov '14

As review manager I am forwarding this review sent to me: - What is your evaluation of the design? - What is your evaluation of the implementation? Design an implementation look good to me. Spreadsort has a clean interface and the code is readable. I tried the algorithm out a few years ago in a project at work (our product in the EDA industry) for sorting 32-bit {x,y} coordinate data cast to a 64-bit integer, and for sorting 32-bit values within scanlines. The speedup was about 1.8x that of std::sort() for ~100M values. This translated into a 10-20% overall runtime reduction in that tool, with only a few lines of code changes. - What is your evaluation of the documentation? I haven't read through the documentation in detail, but I have read through the code and the comments so I feel I understand the basics of how the sorting algorithm works. - What is your evaluation of the potential usefulness of the library? I would say this library is very useful for specific tasks involving large datasets that need to be sorted, especially in cases where the data is already partially sorted and contains many duplicate values. For example, it could be useful for EDA applications, computational geometry, some types of databases, etc. It may be a fairly narrow user base but I think it could add significant value. - Did you try to use the library? With what compiler? Did you have any problems? I built and tested spreadsort on both linux/gcc and Windows/MSVC++. I was never successful in running the tests in Cygwin. It seemed to work as expected when I tried using it inside an EDA tool and caused no problems. - How much effort did you put into your evaluation? A glance? A quick reading? In-depth study? I spent some hours reviewing the algorithm a few years ago, and I provided Steve with feedback to improve the code. I was mostly interested in the integer sorting aspect at that time, but did experiment with floating-point numbers as well. I read through the code again recently to familiarize myself with it. - Are you knowledgeable about the problem domain? I would say that I'm knowledgeable of applications and uses of sorting large datasets, and algorithms in general. I don't have any specific experience in developing or testing sorting algorithms. - Do you think the library should be accepted as a Boost library? Yes, I believe Steve has put in enough work to make this a well designed, tested, and documented library. There are real numbers to show the performance improvements over other sorting algorithms. If this was part of Boost, I would probably use it in our product at my company. Frank Gennari

1 0

which submodule are boost headers in?
by Robert Ramey 13 Nov '14

13 Nov '14

This is making me feel really dumb. I want to remove a header in the /boost/ directory. This has been superseded by a header of the same name in the serialization library. boost/strong_typedef.hpp I expected to find a sub-module in modular boost which I can just select, get permission to make changes and upload my change - just remove this file. But I don't find a sub-module which seems to contain this header. So I need some help. Actually the simplest would be for someone who understands this and has appropriate privileges to just do the dirty work for me and remove the file. Failing that, someone can explain the procedure for finding the file, and getting the requisite privileges. Robert Ramey -- View this message in context: http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/which-submodule-are-boost-headers-in-tp4… Sent from the Boost - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

2 2

[site] uBLAS documentation page link is broken
by Renato Florentino Garcia 13 Nov '14

13 Nov '14

The uBLAS documentation link[1] on Boost libs documentation page[2] is broken. The previous released version[3] is yet working nevertheless. Regards, Renato Garcia [1]: http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/release/libs/numeric/ublas/doc/index.htm [2]: http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/ [3]: http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_56_0/libs/numeric/ublas/doc/index.htm

2 1

[smart_ptr] explicit instantiation of boost::shared_ptr
by Petr Machata 12 Nov '14

12 Nov '14

Hi there, I got a bug report that the following code doesn't compile: #include <boost/tr1/memory.hpp> template class boost::shared_ptr<int>; int main(int, char**) {} The errors this gives under GCC 4.9 are as follows: In file included from /usr/include/boost/shared_ptr.hpp:17:0, from /usr/include/boost/tr1/memory.hpp:56, from foo3.cc:1: /usr/include/boost/smart_ptr/shared_ptr.hpp: In instantiation of 'typename boost::detail::sp_array_access<T>::type boost::shared_ptr<T>::operator[](std::ptrdiff_t) const [with T = int; typename boost::detail::sp_array_access<T>::type = void; std::ptrdiff_t = long int]': foo3.cc:2:23: required from here /usr/include/boost/smart_ptr/shared_ptr.hpp:663:22: error: return-statement with a value, in function returning 'void' [-fpermissive] return px[ i ]; This in particular is with boost 1.54. The problem is however present on master as well, where it also gives more errors relating to boost/core/demangle.hpp that I didn't look into. I went ahead to do some investigation in case the issue ends up being trivial. We can't use enable_if to disable a particular member function. Not unless it's a template. Making it a template would lead to a code like this: template <class U = T, class V = boost::disable_if <boost::is_void <boost::detail::sp_array_access< U >::type>, U>::type> boost::detail::sp_array_access< T >::type operator[] (etc. etc.); ... which is not C++98, and I don't have ideas how to C++98-ify it while also having it do what we want without breaking API. (The indirection through U may not be necessary, I'm not in fact sure, but that doesn't change anything.) One way that I can see is extracting element_type * px to a base class (say, boost::detail::sp_operator_at) that either does or does not define operator[] (which would then use the px). But that implies some amount of code motion, and not knowing what your position would be, I didn't want to blindly go ahead and start moving stuff around. So, would a patch to the effect described above be possibly acceptable? Thanks, Petr.

2 5

[Fusion] Lots of test failures on develop
by Louis Dionne 12 Nov '14

12 Nov '14

I'm getting a lot of test failures on the develop branch of Fusion on OS X. There are too many to paste the output here. Note that master is just fine. Are the unit tests being run automatically each time a pull request is merged? Louis

5 8

Boost.Build: new tutorial
by Vladimir Prus 12 Nov '14

12 Nov '14

Back in 2009, Boris Schäling wrote a Boost.Build tutorial that many deemed to be better than the tutorial in the official documentation. It took quite some time, but it's now part of Boost.Build, here: http://www.boost.org/build/tutorial.html I'd appreciate any comments. Note that previously, I planned to integrate this tutorial with the boostbook documentation. It's becoming clear that there's just no time for that, and the tutorial is added as HTML page. I haven't decided yet what to do with old tutorial in boostbook sources. -- Vladimir Prus CodeSourcery / Mentor Embedded http://vladimirprus.com

9 14

[multi_index] Doc suggestion.
by Mostafa 11 Nov '14

11 Nov '14

Not being able to mutate elements through non-const iterators is surprising enough that I forget about it every time I use Boost.MultiIndex. Part of the reason for this is that this information is buried under section "multi_index/doc/tutorial/basics.html#seq_indices". I suggest that the following paragraph: "That is, iterators of a sequenced index (of all types of indices, actually) point to constant elements. This limitation might come as a surprise, but it is imposed by the way multi_index_containers work; if elements were allowed to be changed in this manner, we could introduce inconsistencies in other ordered indices of the multi_index_container. Element modification can nevertheless be done by means of update operations." be moved under "multi_index/doc/tutorial/basics.html#iterator_access" as a call-out.

2 5

Boost Incubator Status Report
by Robert Ramey 11 Nov '14

11 Nov '14

Felix Uhl wrote > On 28/10/2014, Rob Stewart wrote: > > >Currently, I am documenting the first version of the library to make it >>available on the Boost Library Incubator website, > > I can hear Robert yelling, "Yes!" Yes! The experience so far with the incubator is very interesting. Here are couple of observations. a) I anticipated more submissions since the process seems so easy and the bar is very low. As a practical matter the requirements boil down to having code, tests, documentation which implies some examples. There are no restrictions of format of any of these things. But if you troll the net looking for libraries very few library ideas fulfill these requirements. It turns out that fulfilling even these modest (in my view) requirements is more than many people find necessary. b) The quality of the submissions is a lot better then I had anticipated. All of them are credible, serious efforts which are worthy of serious consideration for inclusion in Boost. That's not to say that all would eventually be accepted as I have only given them a cursory examination. c) There are very few comments on the pages of the website and on the library pages. So far there is only one formal review. I'm sort of disappointed in this. It goes to our problem in getting enough reviews in general. The one review (boost compute) was from one who downloaded and tested the library, liked it, and included it in production. Of course the review was very positive. I would hope to see more of this in the future. d) To support more reviews, I have on my todo list to keep track of who invokes the download/repo links and match them up with the users email address and send out a gentle reminder that if he spent the time to look at and consider the library, he should either comment or add a formal review. I would also like to see some of the posting on this list regarding library proposals to moved to the library comments page. Another alternative would be to link from the library comment page to the developer's list thread(s) which touch upon the library. In any case, I want to see more activity in this area. Any of these require good experience with wordpress and some available time - so I don't see these happening soon. e) I would like to see a little more support from Boost Steering Committee on this effort. Specifically I would like to see the Announcement that Boost endorses the Boost Library Incubator (www.blincubator) packaged and distributed as press release so that it would show up in places like Dr Dobbs Journal. (http://www.drdobbs.com) and isocpp.org (http://isocpp.org) It is a great disappointment to me that in spite of a fair amount of effort, I've been unable to get these sites (among others) to announce the Boost endorsement of Boost Library Incubator. Finally - By next monday, I'll have in place a new facility. This is support on the library page whereby companies which have interest in a particular library will be able to contact the library author in order to offer financial sponsorship for his efforts. Companies which do this will be able to ask for special features and/or extensions, custom versions, extra support or anything they want. Authors will have the option of placing sponsors logos and links on their library pages. This will offer developers of open source the first opportunity in history to be compensated as the rock stars we are. Thanks for everyone for help so far in promoting the Boost Library Incubator. Please continue your efforts. Robert Ramey -- View this message in context: http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/Boost-Incubator-Status-Report-tp4668747.… Sent from the Boost - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

12 42

Please welcome Nevin Liber as a list moderator
by Beman Dawes 11 Nov '14

11 Nov '14

Nevin has been a long-time Boost Users list moderator, C++Now participant, and C++ committee member. He has graciously agreed to help moderate the Boost developers list. Please welcome Nevin as a list moderator! --Beman

6 5

[git][flyweight] something messed up with master and develop branch
by Joaquin M Lopez Munoz 11 Nov '14

11 Nov '14

Dear Git connoiseurs: I've realized that my master and develop branches at boostorg/flwight appear collapsed: https://github.com/boostorg/flyweight/network Yet I am seemingly able to treat them separately: commit to develop, test, merge to master etc. The only weird thing is the diagram above and the fact that the commit log in master doesn't have the usual "Merge branch 'develop'" commits: https://github.com/boostorg/flyweight/commits/master Any clue what's going on? Thank you! Joaquín M López Muñoz Telefónica

4 9

[release][1.58.0] Updating master and other business.
by Daniel James 10 Nov '14

10 Nov '14

Hello all, It's almost a week since the release, so unless there are any objections I'll restart automatically updating the master branch of the super project in a day or so. I'll also tag the submodules for the last two releases. Please can someone with the appropriate Trac permissions update the milestones and versions. Finally, if anyone has any new libraries that they want to include in the next release, please let us know soon. thanks, Daniel

4 5

VC14 CTP4 Atomic don't compile with boost::chrono durations which are not TriviallyCopyable
by Klaim - Joël Lamotte 10 Nov '14

10 Nov '14

I was testing my code with VC14 and found this issue. I'm just not sure what to do about it, should I consider it a bug of Boost.Chrono or not? This complete example does not compile in VC14 CTP4: #include <atomic> #include <boost/chrono.hpp> std::atomic<boost::chrono::milliseconds> ms; // error C2338: atomic<T> requires T to be trivially copyable. Using the standard library instead works as expected: #include <atomic> #include <chrono> std::atomic<std::chrono::milliseconds> ms; // no error The compiler is correct that boost::chrono::duration is not trivially copyable (as described on cppreference.com at least) but it seems (from looking at the code) that it's mostly concept check code used in constructors definitions that trigger the problem. So I'm not sure if it should be fixed or not or what to do with this info.

2 3

Boost library incubator problem
by Edward Diener 10 Nov '14

10 Nov '14

When I go to the Boost Library Incubator at http://rrsd.com/blincubator.com/, click on the libraries listed alphabetically, and then click on any library, I get: "Not Found Apologies, but the page you requested could not be found. Perhaps searching will help."

2 5

Re: [boost] Boost Incubator Status Report
by Felix Uhl 08 Nov '14

08 Nov '14

Rob Stewart wrote: > When interviewing C++ developers, I find those using Boost libraries, at least beyond shared_ptr, are rare. > The brand is known by relatively few, and it is used, to any significant extent, by fewer still. > That implies the need to grow our ranks through some form of advertising. I came to the observation that boost is well known in more experienced circles of programmers, but, as you said, not that frequently used. As it was previously mentioned, this issue could be solved by entering collaborations with compiler distributors to include boost, or at least a subset of it in their compiler. The only reason STL is used so heavily is because it is a pseudo part of the language, bundled with every compiler, a consistent, standardised foundation to rely on. If the inclusion of boost was as simple as the inclusion of the STL, more programmers would use it. This is what boost seemed like to me after reading herb sutters books: It is a less coherent extension of STL, an idea of what the future might hold. Imagine how well boost would be known if it was bundled with MSVC and gcc. --- Felix Uhl ________________________________ Von: Rob Stewart<mailto:robertstewart@comcast.net> Gesendet: ‎08.‎11.‎2014 11:48 An: boost(a)lists.boost.org<mailto:boost@lists.boost.org> Betreff: Re: [boost] Boost Incubator Status Report On November 7, 2014 5:35:02 PM EST, Edward Diener <eldiener(a)tropicsoft.com> wrote: >On 11/7/2014 11:23 AM, Robert Ramey wrote: >> Vladimir Prus-3 wrote > > The motivation behind the >> design of the incubator is to "make participation easier" by >decoupling the >> preparation of the review from a specific 1-2 week time frame. It >was also >> specifically designed to not alter the actual Boot Review process. > >Other than lengthening the formal review process to encourage more >people to participate I do not see any means to get people more >interested in reviewing Boost libraries. That is the notion behind the incubator: allow the review period to be open indefinitely, particularly in advance of the formal review period. > As far as the incubator is >concerned I feel it is a good idea but nobody is using it to comment on >libraries. Links from the review queue to the incubator page for each library could help people discover the incubator. > As far as Boost reviews it appears that most programmers are >afraid to even make comments about a potential library in which they >may be interested. Maybe the specter of C++ experts scares them away. Maybe >they feel that they might look foolish if they make a comment which is >based on just a partial understanding of the library involved. What leads you to that conclusion? There are multiple factors that prevent my commenting on a library: * No interest in the domain * No knowledge of the domain * Too busy I realize I'm not in the "too afraid because of experts" camp you describe, but I've not commented on any of the libraries and it isn't due to fear. >Finally there is a decided problem with the lack of people willing to >be >review managers for a library. I think it would be a good idea to >establish a pool of people, with their e-mail addresses, willing to be >review managers and then when a library is on the review queue one of >the review managers would send out e-mail to all people in the pool >asking each one if he would be willing to be the review manager for a >particular library. If no one at a given time in the pool will agree, >then after some pre-established time period the process repeats itself. I've offered to be a review manager a couple of times, but the libraries never went to review or another did the job. However, the last I looked there were multiple libraries I don't feel competent to judge. Being a review manager is more than verifying that examples compile, that documentation exists, etc. One must be able to judge comments and reviews to decide between opposite views, etc. That requires domain knowledge and experience, if not expertise. There are fewer general purpose libraries on tap now. Obviously, folks have more or less time at different periods of their lives, so one can go through periods of no or little participation. There's also the real issue of changes to the industry. As one seeks interesting and lucrative or stable employment, one may target new kinds of development which can mean new languages. Thus, one may retain a more nostalgic interest in C++, but no longer be interested to invest the time needed to be a review manager. To solve those problems requires finding and engaging new blood. When interviewing C++ developers, I find those using Boost libraries, at least beyond shared_ptr, are rare. The brand is known by relatively few, and it is used, to any significant extent, by fewer still. That implies the need to grow our ranks through some form of advertising. ___ Rob (Sent from my portable computation engine) _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

1 0

Re: [boost] Boost Incubator Status Report
by Felix Uhl 08 Nov '14

08 Nov '14

Robert Ramey wrote: > If you select the "Display Statistics" Button on the Safe Numerics and > display the last 60 days of activity, you can see that the library page has > 50 visits. This is not a huge number. A book on Amazon might > sell 1000 copies and get a couple of reviews (most of whom are > likely the author's relatives). So as the incubator becomes more > a "go to" place to look for libraries, the question of small number > of reviews would solve itself. (hopefully). It seems to me that the whole point that is missing from the incubator is actual usage of it. I like the concept a lot, but do you actually have any plans on how to increase the usage? Just adding features isn’t going to help as long as you haven’t reached a critical point in community size where people start spreading the word on new features. I think this is a very inherent problem to a programmers way of thinking: We envision a great platform, a great framework, a great tool, and set out to implement it, but after doing so, have no idea on how to do follow-up work: Financials, Community building and management, “marketing” or just garnering interest in your project in the first place. In short: What you want to do with the incubator is great, and if it gets going it will quite surely be a great addition to boost. But how will you get it going? --- Felix Uhl Von: Robert Ramey Gesendet: ‎Freitag‎, ‎7‎. ‎November‎ ‎2014 ‎23‎:‎57 An: boost(a)lists.boost.org Edward Diener-3 wrote > Other than lengthening the formal review process to encourage more > people to participate I do not see any means to get people more > interested in reviewing Boost libraries. As far as the incubator is > concerned I feel it is a good idea but nobody is using it to comment on > libraries. > > As far as Boost reviews it appears that most programmers are > afraid to even make comments about a potential library in which they may > be interested. Maybe the specter of C++ experts scares them away. Maybe > they feel that they might look foolish if they make a comment which is > based on just a partial understanding of the library involved. If you select the "Display Statistics" Button on the Safe Numerics and display the last 60 days of activity, you can see that the library page has 50 visits. This is not a huge number. A book on Amazon might sell 1000 copies and get a couple of reviews (most of whom are likely the author's relatives). So as the incubator becomes more a "go to" place to look for libraries, the question of small number of reviews would solve itself. (hopefully). And of course if one can make a review at the moment he's decided to use or discard the library, it's more likely that, being in a state of ecstasy or frustration, he'll display his feelings by making a review while the facts and emotion are fresh in his mind. > Finally there is a decided problem with the lack of people willing to be > review managers for a library. Again, if we had more "pre-reviews" getting a review manager would be a snap. a) a library with a large number of negative pre-reviews will likely not even be selected for review. b) a library with no reviews suggests that it's not getting enough usage to be useful so maybe it's not worth reviewing. b) a library with a large number of positive reviews - it's easy to be the review manager. c) for the rest - well, at least the manager knows what he's in for. That might make it easier. In short, I would hope if we can make the incubator a success, it will help with the shortage of review managers. If any library in the incubator ever gets enough reviews, and gets reviewed, and passes review, I intend to leave all the reviews on display indefinitely. In fact, I intend to allow anyone to post review in the future. Current boost libraries vary a lot in quality but our current setup doesn't make that visible. Robert Ramey -- View this message in context: http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/Boost-Incubator-Status-Report-tp4668747p… Sent from the Boost - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

2 1